Jfsram

Which is a better engine?

I think the aftermarket and the lightweight of a pre 93 Mustangs have made the 5L's stars in most peoples eyes but are they all that?

Your thoughts.

defconfire

Mod engines really aren't that great, Not enough aftermarket. The 2v's are really a joke without some sort of F/I

The 4v's are really rev happy and they make pretty good n/a power.

SHO NO MERCY

The aftermarket is quite large for the fox. In terms of aftermarket I think the 4.6 has its own advantages over the 5.0 such as forced induciton. Since F/I is becoming more realistic and available with today's technology I think it's easier and cheaper with the birth of centri superchargers to have your 4.6 blown then it ever was for a 5.0.

The fact that the 5L have a single cam and pushrods could be seen as an advantage or a disadvantage depending on reliability compared to performance.

From what I understand about 5.0s compared to 4.6s is the way they respond to aftermarket mods. Our 4.6s are a joke in terms of full bolt-on/hp gain ratio compared to the way a 5.0 responds. Then again the 4.6 also comes stock with 260hp, which is more than the 5.0 put out from the factory.

They're really more about what you want. Effeciency and power of the 4.6 or the less effecient, cheaper to mod, meaner sounding, more potential 5.0.

I'm on the look out for a roller 5.0 notch or an sn-95 5.0 for my next project. There's more ups and downs to both motors and someone with more experience can definately ellaborate on my comments, but that's my two cents.

silverstang1996

Sho no mercy put it very well. If this is a "should i get 5.0 or 4.6" If it's just a question comparing the motors, I'd say go with a 5.0 or 4.6 4v. The 4.6 2v is an expensive motor to mod (so is the 4v but it has better power out of the box), and as the guy above me said, they don't respond well to mods.
5.0=cheap, easy to make power, kinda slow from the start
4.6 2v (99+)=faster from the start, hard to make any well power without F/I which means a lot of spending
4.6 4v= fastest from the start, can make well power N/A or a lot with F/I but is probably the most expensive.

Fuel

https://mustangforums.com/forum/5-0-...-to-5-0-a.html

i made this post in the 5.0 Tech section, might be a good read for u

Quicktime_GT

stock vs stock a 99+ 4.6 runs better.

It only takes a set of explorer GT40 heads an intake and cam for a 5.0 to waken up quite a bit.

Here's my choices.. If your goal is:

stock 4.6
300rwhp na 5.0
400rwhp 4.6 with blower
400rwhp na 5.0
700rwhp 4v 4.6 with turbos
over 1000rwhp 5.0 or windsor based pushrod

945LSTANG

thats also very easy to achieve in a n/a mach 1.

defconfire

True, A Mach 1 can achieve those numbers but it'll cost you quite a bit more than a 1987 LX.

945LSTANG

agreed

boduke0220

can you really get 400 hp na with a 5.0?